The use of participatory methodologies for conducting literacy activities. A perfect but not explicit fit
DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-07-2017-0075 |
Published date | 10 October 2017 |
Date | 10 October 2017 |
Pages | 456-470 |
Author | Juan D. Machin-Mastromatteo |
Subject Matter | Library & information science,Librarianship/library management,Library & information services |
The use of participatory
methodologies for conducting
literacy activities
A perfect but not explicit fit
Juan D. Machin-Mastromatteo
Faculty of Philosophy and Letters, Autonomous University of Chihuahua,
Chihuahua, Mexico
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to construct the basis for a research agenda that integrates
participatorymethodologies (PMs) into literacies (L) researchand practice as a valuable methodological basis.
Design/methodology/approach –The pros and cons of using PM on L research and practice are
explained, as well as its possibilities, characteristicsand the contributions of a research agenda under such
integration (PM-L agenda). This analysis draws from the pertinent literature, Scopus publication data, the
author’s own practice as an information literacy (IL) researcher and a questionnaire used to gather further
insightsfrom the research community in this matter.
Findings –A further understanding of the contributions that a PM-L research agenda can bring to the
library and information sciencefield is achieved. The pros, cons, hesitations and eagerness that researchers
might have towardthe idea of using such integration are valuable for determining if this really is a perfect but
not an explicit fit.
Research limitations/implications –Although the questionnaire was promoted in a large
international conference during a four-year period (2013-2017), it was answered by 34 participants; only 16
participants had previous experiences with the PM-L integration, and only an average of 8 participants
provided significantanswers to our open-ended questions. Thus, the amountof data available to analyze was
limited. Certainly,using Scopus data provides a large but incompletepicture of the specialized literature that
is peer reviewedand indexed, because it excludes publicationsnot indexed that may be pertinent.
Originality/value –The PM-L integration is deemed as highly adequate, as PMs seek to improve
participants’conditions,situations and realities through reflectionand engagement, while L-related activities
and research (including information, digital, media literacy or new literacies) are conducted to improve
people’s use and understandingof the media for which they are developing literacy. This contributesto their
betterment as critical-thinkers, persons, citizens and learners. However, many researchers and especially
practitionersdo not formally use PM to conduct L activities, at least in many cases, this is not made explicitly.
In the case of practitioners, some have conducted such activities empirically, without an appropriate
methodological foundation.Hence, to establish PM as the methodologies of choice may help researchersand
practitionershave a stronger methodological basis to conduct their work.
Keywords Practice, Research, Participatory methodologies, Information literacy, Action research,
Participatory action research
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
This paper offers directions toward constructing the basis for a research agenda that
integrates participatory methodologies (PMs) into literacies research and practice as a
valuable methodological basis. To achieve this purpose, this paper explains the pros and
cons of using PM on L research and practice are, as well as its possibilities, characteristics
ILS
118,9-10
456
Received21 July 2017
Revised9 September 2017
Accepted5 October 2017
Informationand Learning Science
Vol.118 No. 9-10, 2017
pp. 456-470
© Emerald Publishing Limited
2398-5348
DOI 10.1108/ILS-07-2017-0075
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/2398-5348.htm
To continue reading
Request your trial